Objective: To compare the efficacy and toxicity between gemcitabine plus cisplatin and plus carboplatin in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 iv, d1, 8...Objective: To compare the efficacy and toxicity between gemcitabine plus cisplatin and plus carboplatin in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 iv, d1, 8; cisplatin 75 mg/m2 iv, d1, or 25 mg/m2 iv, d1-3; carboplatin AUC = 5 iv, d1; repeated every 21 days. Results: All 76 cases were available for objective response. Gemcitabine + cisplatin (GCis) group: among 33 cases, CR 1 case, PR 13 cases, MR 3 cases, SD 7 cases, PD 9 cases, response rate, disease control rate, time to progress (TTP), median survival time (MST) and 1-, 2-year survival rates were 42.42% (14/33), 72.73% (24/33), 5 months, 14 months and 66.67% (22/33), 12.12% (4/33), respectively; Gemcitabine + carboplatin (GCarb) group: among 43 cases, PR 13 cases, MR 11 cases, SD 7 cases, PD 12 cases, the results while comparing with those of GCis group were 30.23% (13/43), 72.09% (31/43), 4 months, 11 months and 48.84% (21/43), 2.33% (1/43), respectively. Among them, only MST between the two groups had significant statistic difference (χ2 = 2.45, P = 0.017). Mild to modest myelo-suppression as well as nausea and vomiting were observed. Conclusion: Both GCis and GCarb regimens had active and well-tolerated toxicity for advanced NSCLC. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy yields a substantial effective advantage over carboplatin-based regimens. Therefore, carboplatin and cisplatin are not equal-active and that cisplatin-based doublet regimens should remain the standard first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC with good performance status.展开更多
基金Scientific and Technical Development Project of Jiangsu Province (No. BS2006005)
文摘Objective: To compare the efficacy and toxicity between gemcitabine plus cisplatin and plus carboplatin in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 iv, d1, 8; cisplatin 75 mg/m2 iv, d1, or 25 mg/m2 iv, d1-3; carboplatin AUC = 5 iv, d1; repeated every 21 days. Results: All 76 cases were available for objective response. Gemcitabine + cisplatin (GCis) group: among 33 cases, CR 1 case, PR 13 cases, MR 3 cases, SD 7 cases, PD 9 cases, response rate, disease control rate, time to progress (TTP), median survival time (MST) and 1-, 2-year survival rates were 42.42% (14/33), 72.73% (24/33), 5 months, 14 months and 66.67% (22/33), 12.12% (4/33), respectively; Gemcitabine + carboplatin (GCarb) group: among 43 cases, PR 13 cases, MR 11 cases, SD 7 cases, PD 12 cases, the results while comparing with those of GCis group were 30.23% (13/43), 72.09% (31/43), 4 months, 11 months and 48.84% (21/43), 2.33% (1/43), respectively. Among them, only MST between the two groups had significant statistic difference (χ2 = 2.45, P = 0.017). Mild to modest myelo-suppression as well as nausea and vomiting were observed. Conclusion: Both GCis and GCarb regimens had active and well-tolerated toxicity for advanced NSCLC. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy yields a substantial effective advantage over carboplatin-based regimens. Therefore, carboplatin and cisplatin are not equal-active and that cisplatin-based doublet regimens should remain the standard first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC with good performance status.
